Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week ...

Another week, another Monday morning -- and another chance to catch up on whatever you missed on the IPKat's weblog last week.  Here comes the 33rd weekly round-up of last week's Katposts, recorded by the sensitive pen of Katfriend par excellence Alberto Bellan, who writes as follows:
When friendship is re-interpreted: Italy and San Marino take new view on IP rights 
Italy and San Marino's treaty on IP recognition seems to be over. But what about existing rights, Jeremy asks on behalf of a concerned [and now better-informed] reader 
Problems and imperfections in biotech patenting: realities on the ground and trying to fix the system 
This is the last post in this series of six on biotech, which Suleman has kindly written for the happiness of both patent and non-patent enthusiasts. The earlier posts can be found here (introductory), here (ethics), here (case law), here (strategies for protecting biotech inventions) and here (financing). This post summarises the issues of drug prices and access to medicines, which received the most comments from readers of the previous posts.  
* Evoking Audrey Hepburn's image in an ad is not OK, says Italian court 
 Katfriends Elisabetta Mina and Marina Lanfranconi (MILA Legal) write about an intriguing case recently decided by the District Court of Milan and concerning unauthorised use of evocative elements of Audrey Hepburn's image in an advertisement. 
 * Spanish Supreme Court asks: does compensation for moral prejudice tie in with lump sum IP infringement damages? 
 Valentina reports on a new reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as to compensation for damage by means of the reasonable-royalty criterion and restoration of moral prejudice. 
 "Fool's errand": no need to create your own brand if you can use someone else's Jeremy notes Speciality European Pharma Ltd v Doncaster Pharmaceuticals Group Ltd & Madaus GmbH [2015] EWCA Civ 54 [on which see earlier katpost here], a trade mark infringement decision of the Court of Appeal, England and Wales, on parallel importation and over-stickering of pharmaceutical products. 
 The Logic of Innovation and IP in Europe 
 Jeremy reviews The Logic of Innovation: Intellectual Property, and What the User Found There, from emeritus Kat and eminent academic Johanna Gibson (Herchel Smith Professor of Intellectual Property Law, Queen Mary University of London) and the fourth edition of Tritton on Intellectual Property in Europe, the standard work named after Katfriend and greatly ironic soul Guy Tritton (Hogarth Chambers). 
 Italian baked goods sound and taste great: but can they be branded in foreign markets? 
 How come prestigious Italian food brands are often relegated to serving as a mere private label manufacturer for the benefit of foreign mega-retailers, wonders Neil. 
 Bayer feels the pain: branded Naproxen can't invoke the territoriality principle
Katfriend Marty Schwimmer reports on Belmora LLC v Bayer Consumer Care AG and Bayer Healthcare LLC, 1:14-cv-00847-GBL (EDVA Feb. 6, 2015), a recent US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruling that deals with Article 6bis of the Paris Convention in the US as it applies to Bayer’s trade mark ‘FLANAX’. 
 European trade mark judges: it's time to join the Circle 
 CET-J is an independent group of 15 trade mark judges from Austria, Hungary, Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, Turkey, France the United Kingdom, Portugal, Italy, Germany, and OHIM. As Jeremy recounts, the group is open both to new judges joining its meetings and sponsors. 
 If Innocent is innocent, who then is at fault? A tale of Dudes and Smoothies 
 Katfriend Richard Kempner discusses Fresh Trading Limited v Deepend Fresh Recovery Limited and Andrew Thomas Robert Chappell [2015] EWHC 52 (Ch), a Chancery Division, England and Wales, decision addressing the copyright ownership in the ‘Dude’, ie the logo used on Innocent’s smoothie bottle in the past 15 years. 
 Blurred Lines: sound-alike litigation in the music industry 
While the copyright dispute involving Robin Thicke and Marvin Gaye [see here and here] is entering the trial phase, Tom sinks his paws in the world of infringement in the music industries, between occasional similarities and copies that go beyond mere coincidence. 
 "Oh-oh! It's the EPO": More Munich mewsings from Merpel 
 Merpel has it from an unimpeachable source that earlier last week, there was an informal get-together of European Patent Office's Administrative Council chairman. She couldn’t wait to tell the IPKat readers what that is about. 
 To Kill a Mockingbird; the challenge where where sequel is prequel Many decades after the publication of To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee’s lawyer said they had just found an unpublished sequel of that classic novel, which will be launched in July 2015. Some say Ms Lee is currently not in full control of her mind; some say the sequel is not entirely genuine  -- and these are not the only tricky issues surrounding this tale, recounts Neil.  
Personalised Medicines: a Presidential Initiative, inherent treatments, Mayo and Akamai 
 As President Obama announces significant investments to ‘pioneer a new model of patient-powered research’, Biotech Kat Suleman seizes the chance to revisit the topic of personalized medicine [on which he previously enlightened the readership here].  
 Never too late 32 [week ending Sunday 8 February] –- Brazilian PTO’s delays | The Research Handbook on International Intellectual Property reviewed | Laura Smith-Hewitt | IP, women and leadership: the poll responses | Decline of West’s trust in innovation | Wikipedia public domain photos |CJEU in Case C-383/12 P Environmental Manufacturing LLP v OHIM | The Nordic IP Forum | The future of EPO’s BoA | Warner-Lambert v Actavis Mark 2 | Dragons' Den: where entertainment meets mis-advice? | Hospira v Genetech Mark 1, the AppealLitigation-Proof Patents: Avoiding the Most Common Patent Mistakes and Patent Portfolios: Quality, Creation, and Cost reviewed | Italy and San Marino’s friendship on IP is over| Problems and imperfections in biotech patenting: realities on the ground and trying to fix the system. 
 Never too late 31 [week ending Sunday 1 February] -- Women in IP, a MIP’s perspective | Another linking reference to the CJEU | Catarina Holtz on Disciplinary authority over the EPO BoA | EPO pays to say that patent examiners’ life is truly cool | You can’t name your daughter ‘Nutella’ | CJEU in Arne Forsgren v Österreichisches Patentamt | Blocking injunctions in Greece | IPEC and bondage in Haiss v Ball | Present and future of patent profession | Belgium asks CJEU: does the Enforcement Directive allow cost-capping in IP litigation? | Dutch diverge with English as Novartis prevails on Zoledronic Acid in Netherlands | Slogan and TMs | The coffee capsule wars | Declining public trust in innovation | IPEC’s ruling in Global Flood Defence Systems & Another v Van den Noort Innovations BV & Others | Again on CJEU ruling in Case C-419/13 Art & Allposters | Biotech financing: the risk components, ‘going long’ and patents as knowledge currency. 
Never too late 30 [week ending Sunday 25 January] -- Julia Reda’s EU copyright revolution | GC on trade-marketing bottle shapes in (T-69/14 and T-70/14) | IPKat and BLACA’s event on Sensory copyright | IP Cross-Border Enforcement | US Supreme Court in Teva v Sandoz | On-line copyright infringement in Spain | GC on the ‘Pianissimo’ trade mark for vacuum cleaners in Case T‑11/14 Grundig Multimedia AG v OHIM  | Judicial Independence - the EPO Responds to Sir Robin Jacob's Letter | Second medical use claims, skinny labels, and public policy in Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF & Others  | CJEU on exhaustion of copyright in Case C-419/13  Art & Allposters | CJEU confirms accessibility jurisdiction criterion for copyright infringement cases in Hejduk | the Court of Appeal for England and Wales takes Rihanna’s passing off claim under its umbrella | EPO invites its examiners to perform non-examining functions | Trade mark troubles in the Galapagos Islands | C5's 7th Forum on "Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation" | Strategies for patenting biotech inventions | US Court of Appeals on first-sale doctrine in Omega v Costco
 Never too late 29 [week ending Sunday 18 January] -- Martin Luther King’s movie ‘Selma’ and copyright problems | CJEU’s copyright decisions awaited in 2015 | The Modern Law of Patents reviewed | China becoming a ‘protector’ of patent rights | ‘Je suis charlie’ trade mark in France and OHIM| UK IPO logo’s licensing system | High Court for England and Wales in Enterprise Holdings Inc v Europcar Group UK and Another [2015] EWHC 17 (Ch) | Spain without Google News | CJEU on database protection in Case C-30/14 Ryanair | Can UPC and national law of infringement diverge? | GC on ‘Monaco’ trade mark in Case T-197/13 Monaco v OHIM | Corriere della Sera major infringement in Charlie Hebdo case | GoPro and Apple patent | Biotech patent case law.

Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week ... Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week ... Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, February 16, 2015 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.